3 ms·

There is a huge misconception that professional tasters are rating by their personal preferences. I can't really talk about restaurants, but about wine and spir

by moehm 5y ago

There is a huge misconception that professional tasters are rating by their personal preferences. I can't really talk about restaurants, but about wine and spirits. As a taster, you don't look for things you personally enjoy. You look for "quality". That is, balance, complexity, off-flavors, typicity etc. Just because I like my wine oxidized and my meat burned, I can't say the meal was terrible. (But maybe the service, if you have asked for your steak burned, but got it medium rare.)

refurb 5y ago
But quality is still a subjective measure to a large extent. Sure, if something is so salty it's not palatable or your cheesecake is lumpy, one can have a more objective assessment. But even if "professional tasters" agree on what balance means, that's still a subjective measure agreed upon by a select group. As someone who has eaten at Michelin star restaurant and had a mediocre experience, I'm of the mind if I like it then it's an enjoyable experience. It's pretty irrelevant what professional tasters think.
- moehm 5y ago
  First, it's okay if you enjoy some things and others don't. No critic says you have to enjoy what a "select group" (aka experts) thinks is good quality. Studying food is not different from studying music. Everyone can hear the music and everyone tastes food (daily), but that does not make you an expert in both. > I'm of the mind if I like it then it's an enjoyable experience For you as a normal person that is totally okay, but it is not the standard a good critic should follow.
  - refurb 5y ago
    But my point is the “good critic” is doing nothing more than I am - sharing their own subjective personal preferences? The only difference is they share the same preference as other “good critics”. There is no objective measure that says their subjective experience is more “correct” than mine. It’s no different than art, wine, music, etc.
    - moehm 5y ago
      Again, if you judge a wine, spirits and probably a dish you aren't looking for what you like, but for more objective criteria. Those criteria aren't measured with technology, but the tongue, nose and experience of the taster. I never said it is totally objective (it can't be, because it involves humans), but it is way less subjective than one might think. Those criteria are e.g. complexity, typicity, balance, off-flavors etc and are widely understood. In every wine tasting I participated we had a tasting sheet where we scored a numerical value. There was never a discussion if we "agree on what balance means". In the last tasting (some time ago) we examined a type of wine a co-taster didn't liked at all, but still scored pretty high. Because personal preference != quality of the product. The real problem is that quality doesn't directly translate to enjoyment. I guess most people look for enjoyable wines, not "good" ones. But enjoyment is personal, I don't know which wines you enjoy. But if you ask me blind, I can recommend you some which are at least worth trying. We can fight on quality, but not on enjoyment. And for me, this is the value I get out of professional recommendations: Which things are worth trying, in wine, food or music. Foot note: If you don't trust me (why should you), go and ask a Master of Wine how they judge wine. I'm not a MW, but had the honor and luck to work with some really knowledgable people.

by moehm 5y ago

refurb 5y ago

But quality is still a subjective measure to a large extent. Sure, if something is so salty it's not palatable or your cheesecake is lumpy, one can have a more objective assessment. But even if "professional tasters" agree on what balance means, that's still a subjective measure agreed upon by a select group. As someone who has eaten at Michelin star restaurant and had a mediocre experience, I'm of the mind if I like it then it's an enjoyable experience. It's pretty irrelevant what professional tasters think.

moehm 5y ago
First, it's okay if you enjoy some things and others don't. No critic says you have to enjoy what a "select group" (aka experts) thinks is good quality. Studying food is not different from studying music. Everyone can hear the music and everyone tastes food (daily), but that does not make you an expert in both. > I'm of the mind if I like it then it's an enjoyable experience For you as a normal person that is totally okay, but it is not the standard a good critic should follow.
- refurb 5y ago
  But my point is the “good critic” is doing nothing more than I am - sharing their own subjective personal preferences? The only difference is they share the same preference as other “good critics”. There is no objective measure that says their subjective experience is more “correct” than mine. It’s no different than art, wine, music, etc.
  - moehm 5y ago
    Again, if you judge a wine, spirits and probably a dish you aren't looking for what you like, but for more objective criteria. Those criteria aren't measured with technology, but the tongue, nose and experience of the taster. I never said it is totally objective (it can't be, because it involves humans), but it is way less subjective than one might think. Those criteria are e.g. complexity, typicity, balance, off-flavors etc and are widely understood. In every wine tasting I participated we had a tasting sheet where we scored a numerical value. There was never a discussion if we "agree on what balance means". In the last tasting (some time ago) we examined a type of wine a co-taster didn't liked at all, but still scored pretty high. Because personal preference != quality of the product. The real problem is that quality doesn't directly translate to enjoyment. I guess most people look for enjoyable wines, not "good" ones. But enjoyment is personal, I don't know which wines you enjoy. But if you ask me blind, I can recommend you some which are at least worth trying. We can fight on quality, but not on enjoyment. And for me, this is the value I get out of professional recommendations: Which things are worth trying, in wine, food or music. Foot note: If you don't trust me (why should you), go and ask a Master of Wine how they judge wine. I'm not a MW, but had the honor and luck to work with some really knowledgable people.